History of Men's Fashion: What the Well Dressed Man is Wearing

Introduction

Iremember that Lord Byron once described him to me, as having nothing remarkable in his style of dress, except a certain ‘exquisite propriety’. (Leigh Hunt on Beau Brummell, quoted in Captain William Jesse, The Life of George Brummell, Esq., Commonly called Beau Brummell, 1844).

GEORGE Bryan Brummell (1778 – 1840) was a sometime friend of, and sartorial adviser to, the Prince Regent. He is described on the blue plaque on his former house at 4 Chesterfield Street, Mayfair, as ‘Leader of Fashion’ and is widely recognized as a leading influence in the rise in importance of Savile Row as a centre of excellence for men‘s tailoring. He fled to France on 16 May 1816 (after dining on a cold fowl and a bottle of claret and going to the opera as usual), to escape his creditors after amassing gambling debts. If anything Brummell’s fame in life has been surpassed by the legend and stories still told of his elegance and wit.

George Gordon, Lord Byron (1788 – 1824), was a great Scottish romantic poet and international rascal. It was said that Byron always spoke Brummell’s name with a ‘mixture of jealousy and awe’ and rated him with the victor of Waterloo, the Duke of Wellington, as ‘the greatest men of the age’.

Beau Brummell, as he was in his prime.

Anyone who thinks that he is going everywhere (or even anywhere) should have, as a minimum, the selection of apparel described in this book and realize that if you want to get ahead you need to get a hat – but not just any old hat will do. Moreover, especially bearing in mind that many quotations from other works, in books of all kinds, seldom have anything but amusement value or are merely to show that the author has a thick dictionary of popular quotations at hand, I would urge my reader strictly to apply the essential truths to be found in the quotations in this work in every aspect of personal adornment. In short, when in doubt (over, say, the advisability of purple socks, straw hats in Town or white mess jackets with gold buttons), ask: what would Jeeves have said?

Beau Brummell’s ‘exquisite propriety’ was the reverse of foppery – which is generally (mistakenly) associated even now with Brummell’s name. There was nothing remarkable about his dress except that it was modest, subdued and most proper to the occasion and of the best materials and making. Strictly, he was a Dandy and certainly not a Popinjay. That he did describe himself as a ‘Dandy’ is clear from the fact that he joined with three of his friends to give the Dandies’ Ball in the Argyle Rooms in July 1813, to celebrate their recent gambling wins. The Argyle Rooms were fashionable entertainment rooms on the site of what is now Liberty’s department store, in Argyle Street, off Regent Street.

The friends were William, Lord Alvanley (1789 – 1849), Sir Henry Mildmay Bt (1787 – 1848) and Henry Pierrepont. It was at the Dandies’ Ball that, having been conspicuously snubbed by the Prince Regent, Brummell turned and said in a loud, clear voice to the Regent’s departing back: ‘Alvanley, who’s your fat friend?’ The mortification was not wholly forgiven until George IV’s deathbed when, according to Ian Kelly’s biography of Brummell (Beau Brummell, Sceptre, 2005), one of his last acts was apparently to abandon the feud and to grant Brummell a sinecure in France.

Brummell’s dress derived in some measure from military patterns, cloths and colours (he had held a commission in the 10th Hussars ‘The Prince of Wales’ Own’ cavalry regiment). One of his aphorisms was that the severest mortification a gentleman could incur was to attract observation in the street by his outward appearance – even though Captain Jesse also tells us that his deportment was so striking that, in walking down St James’s Street, he attracted as much attention of the passers-by as the Prince of Wales himself. In short, he looked like somebody.

The Cornish writer, anthologist and academic Sir Arthur Quiller-Couch (‘Q’) (now chiefly remembered for compiling the Oxford Book of English Verse) laid no claim to dandyism of any kind; yet he was remarkable for his dress and the bright colours and checks which he employed; indeed, mention was made of this in an alphabetical rhyme at Cambridge when he was King Edward VII Professor of English literature there:

Q is for Q, in the late Verrall’s boots;

His bedder plays draughts on his cast away suits.

(Dr A.W. Verrall was Q’s immediate predecessor in the chair.) There is a great deal in his dictum that ‘The trousers make the gentleman’, because they are, indeed, of the utmost importance and often overlooked. The overall effect which he unintentionally achieved was to impress such as the author of The Wind in the Willows (and sometime secretary of the Bank of England) Kenneth Grahame and his young son, Alistair: ‘the same Q looking not a day older and even more beautifully dressed than formerly’ (see Brittain’s biography for more details).

Montesquieu’s famous maxim on taste ‘Le goût est un je ne sais quoi’ (literally: ‘Taste is an I don‘t know what‘) is, at once, laconic and telling: we all instinctively know what he meant, even if we cannot all lay claim to the possession of taste or to its habitual and invariable application. I mean, as I sit and write this, my clothing demonstrates nothing less than the yearning of the moth for the star – tatty jumper and rather worn slippers.

Professor J.A.C. Thomas, Professor of Roman Law at University College London, was known for mismatching suits, loose, bright bow ties and scuffed Dr Martens’ boots and he appeared and vanished in a cloud which seemed, at the time, to comprise equal quantities of profound but recondite learning and Wilson’s snuff. However, in his Textbook of Roman Law (1976) he sums up the antiquity, the force and the effect of dress codes for us:

In the Corpus Iuris Civilis (the body of civil law), it is clear, ius non scriptum (unwritten law) signifies custom. Here again it is necessary to particularize what is meant by custom. In modern society, there are practices and conventions which are generally observed though they have no legal, only a social, sanction – there are, for example, many men who think nothing of income tax avoidance but who would rather be seen dead than attend, in other than evening dress with white tie, a function at which ladies were present.

The substance of this statement is no longer true. It was not even true when it was written in 1976. The decline started during the First World War. However, the statement was true within the living memory of some. There is still (just) a social code, a custom, with social sanctions for disobedience to rules such as rules of dress: this code is now, over 30 years after Professor Thomas wrote, fading fast and, with every act of acquiescence to breaches of the code, we show up one aspect of our civilization as falling into a positively Roman decline.

The extent of the decline is emphasized by the fact that now events requiring even basic ‘white tie’ are virtually unknown and black tie requirements are going the same way. The enormously complicated variations in dress at court, as described for all categories of members of the royal household, officers in the navy and military and officials (with further variations, depending on the different occasions), were described in G.A. Titman’s Dress and Insignia Worn at His Majesty’s Court (1937). Since the Second World War the practice of such codes has, nearly entirely, been lost. Being lost with these codes are many of the group identities and even the sense of nationhood which they reinforced. With the loss of these things, social loyalties and convictions, the sense of duty and true patriotism diminish.

We should note and draw a lesson from the fact that the complex head-dresses and arrangements of animal skins of African warriors, specific to tribes, have a real social and military purpose and value and are not vain fripperies.

The Prince of Wales wore the dinner jacket version of Windsor Uniform at the announcement of his engagement to the then Mrs Parker-Bowles. But how many would recognize the scarlet collar and cuffs and special gilt buttons on his dark blue dinner jacket as the derivatives of the Windsor Uniform style of dress for male members of the Royal Household? This uniform reverses the colours of Royal Livery – which has red coats with blue trimmings – and was introduced by George III.

Indeed, now we have modern ‘celebrities’ pitching up to receive official honours in open-necked shirts. Less than 50 years ago people so dressed would not have got through the outer gates – let alone into the royal presence. I am unconvinced that we are a better society for the fact that we are quite so tolerant now; whether in relation to just this sort of thing – or even more important declines in standards, of which this is merely symptomatic.

In The Angel in the Mist Robert Speaight had a character express the opinion that ‘Lobb and Lock . . . are the last luxuries of noble minds’ - which amply demonstrates with what a deadly serious business we are primarily concerned. It is interesting to note too that these businesses (John Lobb and James Lock) have survived in the modern world (Lock’s was established ‘not later than 1676’) because, come hell or high water, there will always be a demand for the very best of everything.

I am not a style consultant or a colour coordinator; if you have invested in this book, the chances are that you have at least a moderately good idea of what colours and styles suit you and, if you fear that you do not, the shops and purveyors described will help you. That is their job. My task is to lead you to them.

Most of the items described in this book may reliably be bought from any of the several obvious makers and suppliers of such goods (bespoke and ready-made) in the magic quadrangle, centred on Piccadilly and represented by Savile Row on the north, Bond Street and St James’s Street on the west, Pall Mall on the south and Regent Street on the east (quite possibly the original ‘gods’ quad’). The name ‘Piccadilly’ derives from a type of high collar once sold in the Strand by a haberdasher called Robert Baker, who started the development of the land around what became Piccadilly Circus. Just spend a lazy afternoon walking around the area and look at the shops.

A feather in every cap: Sir Philip Mitchell, Governor-General of Kenya, and African chiefs awaiting the arrival, in 1952, at Nairobi airport, of the princess who would leave Africa as Queen Elizabeth II. The Governor-General is in his tropical uniform: photograph by Dmitri Kessel (Time and Life Pictures Collection Getty Images)

In Jermyn Street, outside the southern entrance to the Piccadilly Arcade, is the fairly recent (and superbly evocative) statue of Beau Brummell himself by the sculptress Irena Sedlecka. The cost was raised by subscription.

Generally, there is consistency of quality and price. However, in one or two instances, there are certain makers and suppliers which I believe are head and shoulders above the rest and these I mention in due course. Naturally, this is my personal choice and I mean no pejorative inference to be drawn against ‘the rest’.

There are also makers and suppliers of broadly similar quality outside this quadrangle but finding them at all and then finding them consistent in their goods is another matter. However, they can, by virtue of lower overheads, represent true value for money; snip for snip and stitch for stitch. One such excellent place, for quality, consistency, price and overall value for money, is tailors Connock & Lockie in Lamb’s Conduit Street, WC1. There is also Timothy Everest in Spitalfields – who brings a noteworthy contemporary twist to his work and who was acknowledged, and patronized, by the late John Morgan (who wrote for GQ magazine and the ‘Modern Manners’ column in The Times until his untimely death).

Ede & Ravenscroft, Hackett, Gieves & Hawkes and Oliver Brown are all excellent general outfitters who also supply ready-made most items of men’s dress.

Many top London makers travel widely in their business and have schedules for visiting places such as continental Europe, the Americas and parts of the British Commonwealth. Accordingly, you do not necessarily have to be in London to receive the full service with fittings of bespoke clothes. Moreover, after you have satisfactorily established patterns for shirts and lasts for bespoke shoes, fittings for these garments are not usual and changes would need to be made only as weight and bones change in time. W.S. Foster & Son and Henry Maxwell have in their collection of shoe lasts those of famous film director and producer Cecil B. de Mille and these seem to have incorporated possible alterations.

I have eschewed the vulgar excesses of monogrammed (or even coroneted) shirts and silken underwear, pyjamas and dressing gowns; although suits of silk pyjamas (for those who, unlike Winston Churchill and James Bond, have any use for pyjamas at all) are essentials for journeys on sleeper trains (for so long as ‘sleepers’ remain with us).

Visible designer labels are quite repulsive. Savile Row (type) clothes traditionally do not normally bear the maker’s mark or label except inside the inside breast pocket, along with the date, its number and name of customer. I say ‘Savile Row type’ because fewer and fewer top tailors are exactly in ‘the Row’ and they come and go between there and the neighbouring streets: indeed, Brummell (as mentioned, with whom the worldwide reputation of London-made clothes began) patronized, according to his first biographer, Captain Jesse, tailors Schweitzer & Davidson, in Cork Street and Weston in Bond Street. He also patronized Meyer in Conduit Street (now Meyer & Mortimer in Sackville Street): either Meyer or Brummell invented the pantaloon trousers which Brummell was certainly the first to wear in fashionable circles – the drivers of the tumbrels and the husbands of les tricoteuses (the old women who sat around the guillotine watching and knitting, and roaring out their disgusting approval, as the heads rolled) wore a type of loose trousers – rather than breeches – hence their name ‘sans culottes’ (literally ‘without breeches‘).

Unfortunately, all Brummell’s records, including patterns and orders in the shop were lost as a result of enemy action in the Second World War, when Meyer & Mortimer (as they had become) also lost their Paris shop.

Ede & Ravenscroft, the country’s oldest tailors (although they now also have premises in Burlington Gardens) are principally based in Chancery Lane. How wide the magic quadrangle expands virtually should depend upon an objective assessment of the goods themselves and value for money.

Bespoke shirts are, sometimes, discreetly monogrammed and very little else is. However, Lady Diana Cooper ordered a pair of monogrammed slippers for Winston Churchill. They had the initials facing outwards as though to dispel doubt as to the wearer’s identity. (See A.L. Rowse, Memories and Glimpses, 1986.)

If you are going the whole hog to bespeak everything, be prepared for the fact that bespoke shoes may cost as much as, or even more than, a bespoke suit (as, indeed, they